Pectointercostal fascial block (PIFB) and parasternal block (PSB): Two names for the same block?

Comparison of regional anesthetic techniques for postoperative analgesia after adult cardiac surgery: bayesian network meta-analysis

Background

Patients usually suffer acute pain after cardiac surgery. Numerous regional anesthetic techniques have been used for those patients under general anesthesia. The most effective regional anesthetic technique was still unclear.

Methods

Five databases were searched, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library. The efficiency outcomes were pain scores, cumulative morphine consumption, and the need for rescue analgesia in this Bayesian analysis. Postoperative nausea, vomiting and pruritus were safety outcomes. Functional outcomes included the time to tracheal extubation, ICU stay, hospital stay, and mortality.

Results

This meta-analysis included 65 randomized controlled trials involving 5,013 patients. Eight regional anesthetic techniques were involved, including thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA), erector spinae plane block, and transversus thoracic muscle plane block. Compared to controls (who have not received regional anesthetic techniques), TEA reduced the pain scores at 6, 12, 24 and 48 h both at rest and cough, decreased the rate of need for rescue analgesia (OR = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.016-0.55), shortened the time to tracheal extubation (MD = -181.55, 95% CI: -243.05 to -121.33) and the duration of hospital stay (MD = -0.73, 95% CI: -1.22 to -0.24). Erector spinae plane block reduced the pain score 6 h at rest and the risk of pruritus, shortened the duration of ICU stay compared to controls. Transversus thoracic muscle plane block reduced the pain scores 6 and 12 h at rest compared to controls. The cumulative morphine consumption of each technique was similar at 24, 48 h. Other outcomes were also similar among these regional anesthetic techniques.

Conclusions

TEA seems the most effective regional postoperative anesthesia for patients after cardiac surgery by reducing the pain scores and decreasing the rate of need for rescue analgesia.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, ID: CRD42021276645.

Anatomical basis of fascial plane blocks

Fascial plane blocks (FPBs) are regional anesthesia techniques in which the space ("plane") between two discrete fascial layers is the target of needle insertion and injection. Analgesia is primarily achieved by local anesthetic spread to nerves traveling within this plane and adjacent tissues. This narrative review discusses key fundamental anatomical concepts relevant to FPBs, with a focus on blocks of the torso. Fascia, in this context, refers to any sheet of connective tissue that encloses or separates muscles and internal organs. The basic composition of fascia is a latticework of collagen fibers filled with a hydrated glycosaminoglycan matrix and infiltrated by adipocytes and fibroblasts; fluid can cross this by diffusion but not bulk flow. The plane between fascial layers is filled with a similar fat-glycosaminoglycan matric and provides gliding and cushioning between structures, as well as a pathway for nerves and vessels. The planes between the various muscle layers of the thorax, abdomen, and paraspinal area close to the thoracic paravertebral space and vertebral canal, are popular targets for ultrasound-guided local anesthetic injection. The pertinent musculofascial anatomy of these regions, together with the nerves involved in somatic and visceral innervation, are summarized. This knowledge will aid not only sonographic identification of landmarks and block performance, but also understanding of the potential pathways and barriers for spread of local anesthetic. It is also critical as the basis for further exploration and refinement of FPBs, with an emphasis on improving their clinical utility, efficacy, and safety.

Efficacy of parasternal block to decrease intraoperative opioid use in coronary artery bypass surgery via sternotomy: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the effect of a preoperative parasternal plane block (PSB) on opioid consumption required to maintain hemodynamic stability during sternotomy for coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial prospectively enrolled 35 patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft surgery under general anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. Patients were randomized to receive preoperative PSB using either ropivacaine (PSB group) or saline solution (placebo group) (1:1 ratio). The primary endpoint was the maximal effect-site concentration of remifentanil required to maintain heart rate and blood pressure within the recommended ranges during sternotomy.

RESULTS

Median maximum concentration of remifentanil necessary to maintain adequate hemodynamic status during sternotomy was significantly reduced in PSB group (4.2 (2.5-6.0) ng/mL) compared with placebo group (7.0 (5.2-8.0) ng/mL) (p=0.02). Mean maximum concentration of propofol used to control depth of anesthesia was also reduced (3.9±1.1 µg/mL vs 5.0±1.5 µg/mL, PSB vs placebo, respectively; p=0.02). This reduction in propofol consumption during sternotomy enabled a more adequate level of sedation to be maintained in patients (minimum patient state index was 11.7±8.7 in placebo group and 18.3±6.8 in PSB group; p=0.02). PSB reduced postoperative inflammatory response by limiting concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines IL-8, IL-18, IL-23, IL-33 and MCP-1 measured in the first 7-day after surgery (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative PSB reduced the maximum concentrations of remifentanil and propofol required to maintain hemodynamic stability and depth of anesthesia during sternotomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03734159.Sébastien Bloc, M.D.^1,2; Brieuc P. Pérot, Ph.D.³; Hadrien Gibert, M.D.¹; Jean-Dominique Law Koune, M.D.¹; Yannick Burg, M.D.¹; Didier Leclerc, M.D.¹; Anne-Sophie Vuitton, M.D.¹; Christophe De La Jonquière, M.D.¹; Marine Luka, L.S.³; Thierry Waldmann, M.D.⁴; Nicolas Vistarini, M.D.⁴; Stéphane Aubert, M.D.⁴; Mickaël M. Ménager, Ph.D.³; Messaouda Merzoug, Ph.D.²; Cécile Naudin, Ph.D.²; Pierre Squara, M.D.^2,5.